On Feb. 26, ARSA and the Aircraft Electronics Association (AEA) jointly commented on the FAA’s Draft Advisory Circular (AC) 120-78B, “Electronic Signatures, Electronic Recordkeeping, and Electronic Manuals.” The associations acknowledged the draft AC’s “valuable technical instruction” but directed the FAA to amend language creating recordkeeping requirements inconsistent with the aviation safety rules.
“The draft AC confuses the agency’s limited authority to approve electronic recordkeeping systems of certain certificate holders with a guidance-created requirement for FAA ‘acceptance of’ those systems where there is no regulatory basis or need,” the comments said.
The joint comments overviewed the absence of language in parts 43 or 145 directing persons performing maintenance to seek FAA approval or acceptance of their recordkeeping systems. Citing the Code of Federal Regulations, statutes limiting paperwork burdens and guaranteeing the validity of digitalized records, and Department of Transportation Guidance, ARSA and AEA then described how administrative statements in the draft AC created wide latitude for FAA personnel to impose burden certificate holders without regulatory basis. Pushing back against “legislation by guidance,” through which the government imposes responsibilities not found in the plain language of the rules (and without the notice and comment burden imposed on rulemaking activities by the Administrative Procedure Act), is a fundamental tenet of the associations’ regulatory advocacy.
The submission recommend four basic amendments to ensure the guidance may be utilized by industry without imposing any additional requirements:
(1) Clarify the guidance itself creates no requirement for approval, acceptance, or authorization of an electronic recordkeeping or manual system.
(2) State that electronic recordkeeping methods utilized by repair stations (among other certificate holders) will be found acceptable provided they meet the applicable elements of 14 CFR.
(3) Eliminate language making system corrections “incumbent upon the certificate holder” when the rules didn’t require FAA approval or acceptance.
(4) Eliminate language apparently requiring FAA approval or acceptance for use of an electronic signature on a regulatorily required record.
“Advisory circulars are tools to provide compliance assistance for certificate holders,” the comments concluded. “As written, Draft AC 120-78B provides useful technical instruction for persons required or choosing to establish electronic recordkeeping systems and submit their related procedures to the FAA. The draft must be amended to avoid creating any requirement for action by certificate holders, e.g., part 145 repair stations, or the FAA.”
To read the draft AC as made available for comment, click here.
To read ARSA and AEA’s joint comments, click here.
